(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

This is a question by me as a learner (and not regarding 'HowTo') reg a dependency issue: in puppylinux vs BionicDog.

I read that "DebianDog is shaped to look and act like Puppy Linux. Debian structure and Debian behaviour are untouched". But it is NOT puppylinux.

Just out of curiosity, I downloaded BionicDog 64bit and ran from USB stick.
Then for testing, I tried installing 'iridium browser.deb' via dpkg (since the BionicDog supports dpkg).
It didn't go through and dependency errors were shown. Similar error for gcc-4.8-basegcc-4.8-base.

As compared to this, in puppylinux, on clicking the .deb file (or .PET file), the installation was perfect. (All the credit goes to puppy community).

This means that the dependencies were taken care of either in the puppy system or in the .deb file.
But not in the case of BionicDog.

I didn't understand this.

p.s. (also tried to install chromium in BionicDog to see if iridium has something out-of-the-world, but got the same traceback with chromium's .deb file.)

Hi, d_vineet:-

Hm. With it being several years since I had anything to do with Debian-based 'mainstream' distros, I forget the standard routine for dealing with this. I believe what you've got to do is to update the source lists, then search again.

Libatomic is a fairly recent newcomer to browser dependencies, but we have had a number of threads involving this thing. If the worst comes to the worst, you could always do what I do. I'm more of a 'mechanic' than a 'technician', when it boils down to it; if I can't make something move around in the file-system by use of the terminal (the way you're supposed to in Linux!), then I simply log-in as root, and use the file-manager to physically put it where I want it to go, followed by correcting permissions where necessary.....

Maybe not the 'done' thing, but it gets me results..!! Personally, I can't be arsed to learn all that terminal guff; to me, it's too abstract, having to picture in your head what you're doing all the time. Don't get me wrong; it definitely has its uses for certain stuff.....but I'd never make a true 'geek'. If I had to do everything from the command-line, I would never achieve anything. Personally, if I can actually see something, I can understand it better...I'm far happier physically digging around in the guts of the file-system. That's just me!


Mike.

d_vineet wrote:Just out of curiosity, I downloaded BionicDog 64bit and ran from USB stick.
Then for testing, I tried installing 'iridium browser.deb' via dpkg (since the BionicDog supports dpkg).
It didn't go through and dependency errors were shown.
Code:

iridium-browser depends on libatomic1 (>= 4.8 ); however:
Package libatomic1 is not installed.

Sure you can install iridium-browser on BionicDog 64-bit
Download latest deb from here:
https://downloads.iridiumbrowser.de/deb ... m-browser/
If not already done, update the package list first, otherwise libatomic1 cannot be found (probably you didn't do that and got the problem of "not found") Then right-click on the deb (you just downloaded) from Pcmanfm file-manager and choose "Install deb"
Then it will be installed and first gives warning about missing dependency, but later it will install libatomic1

Or... even better, follow the instructions here:
https://iridiumbrowser.de/downloads/debian
That way the iridium repository will be added and iridium-browser installed.
The advantage of this is that you can always upgrade iridium-browser (if available) from Synaptic or with apt-get, e.g.: Same as chrome or chromium it refuses to run as root, unless you add --no-sandbox But there are other ways also, e.g. run it as another user.

EDIT: For info: when installing from commandline with dpkg -i, it should be followed by apt-get -f install (for the missing dependency), e.g: Fred

d_vineet wrote: As compared to this, in puppylinux, on clicking the .deb file (or .PET file), the installation was perfect. (All the credit goes to puppy community).

This means that the dependencies were taken care of either in the puppy system or in the .deb file.

Thanks for the answers.
But still one doubt is uncleared.
If there are dependencies (as per the traceback in debian), how come the package was successfully installed in puppylinux without the same traceback?

d_vineet wrote:

d_vineet wrote: As compared to this, in puppylinux, on clicking the .deb file (or .PET file), the installation was perfect. (All the credit goes to puppy community).

This means that the dependencies were taken care of either in the puppy system or in the .deb file.

Thanks for the answers.
But still one doubt is uncleared.
If there are dependencies (as per the traceback in debian), how come the package was successfully installed in puppylinux without the same traceback?

Could it be that libatomic1 was already installed on the Puppy you tested on ?
In that case the dependency is already satisfied and is just installing the .deb sufficient.
Can you say which Puppy ?

Fred

fredx181 wrote: Could it be that libatomic1 was already installed on the Puppy you tested on ?
In that case the dependency is already satisfied and is just installing the .deb sufficient.
Can you say which Puppy ?

Fred

Latest puppy : Xenialpup 64bit
As you said, the dependencies might already be taken care of, it seems.